Grease power

[preoccupied]

Am I correct in saying that stack of levers is balanced? The weight of the long side of the bar is trying to go down, but the opposing force holds it up.

Sure it's not moving at all so it's balanced. It can't move any there is no path to move through. I want credit for this and anything that I haven't shared yet that I've used in my time travels that I am the source of but I don't know if I will get it. So how it should work is the lever deducts the weight from the ground per suspension of an axle on the ground. The axle on the ground is like a string on a pulley, if like the pulleys had gear trains and deducted more force BUT that I what this idea is. If you think about it if pulleys had gear trains it would deduct distance but what is holding the suspension strong? If strings can hold the suspension strong why can't gears? They do that is the point. It's anti gravity or anti force. Maybe I'm too confident in my idea. I have no physical prototypes on me and no resources to do anything about it and that is why the crowbar dolly is public domain right now because it was a little over a year ago that I mentioned it.

[preoccupied]

I should hate the idea I'm working on? Really? I have to say I have no clue what I'm talking about while I am building something?

I'm not saying he was being polite. He was being disrespectful. It's very aggressive for people to say here that you shouldn't boast about what you think as successful when actually they are not engineers disregarding perpetual motion altogether. That is to be expected of an engineer shutting down the whole idea of perpetual motion. It's rude. We are in a boat of research of lack of ordinary assumptions and we should not be angry at each other for faith in these assumptions. I'm sorry I was being flamboyant too. I don't know why I did that. I have brain malfunctions. I like Vulcans. I get it I disagree with how he said it. I just don't think he meant it how he said it. I think what he meant was more passive aggressive to ask for schematics or something; I'm not sure. But later on in other messages he took back what you believe and that means that he was in fact a little bit passive aggressive in his tone and did not literally mean for you not to build but it was disrespectful, man. You realize you're arguing with someone who probably has a lingering head injury, right?

[MrTim]

I don’t know what is going on here anymore. Jubat doesn’t seem truthful as he seems to know more about the forum history than he should. Jubat is definitely not ABhammer. Looks like to me maybe Jubat and UbWe are the same person. Wish they still had the IP address on the threads. If you were running a different user name before Jubat who was it?

Same here.

??? Jekyll = Hyde , JL = AB ???

maybe Jubat and UbWe are the same person

I think all they have in common is the "ub" in their names (though it could be J(ames)+Ub+we/at ??? ;-)

But all of this silliness should go into a thread of it's own (Sorry for throwing your topic off track, preoccupied! )

[daxwc]

All I know is quit feeding the troll. But if he has made up an imaginary friend 8/

Jubat all I got to say is I will give you the benefit of the doubt, but let it go. He is dragging you through the shit too.

[Trev]

They're destroying the forum. Not a single post about Bessler's wheel this morning. Really needs to be some active moderation. Scott was last on the forum a month ago. If it was up to me I'd have banned the lot of them already.

[preoccupied]

They're destroying the forum. Not a single post about Bessler's wheel this morning. Really needs to be some active moderation. Scott was last on the forum a month ago. If it was up to me I'd have banned the lot of them already.

I think my anti gravity/force idea might be similar to Bessler's thinking. He often hints that there is a secret to lightly lifting things. I guess it's more in the general perpetual motion realm though. I know that when I was a little kid studying University when I had information about Bessler then that I created a gear train using his clues that could have stronger leverage with additional gears in a 1:1 ratio. Yet I could say that his clues are dubious that you can't really give Bessler credit for doing anything than inspiring the process. That gear train business I'm talking about is incredibly dangerous such a thing could potentially destroy a planet and I believe it assisted in me fighting Jupiter aliens in outer space when I was time traveling and these beings were potentially larger than Earth. Try my logic on that too. When the dinosaurs suffered an asteroid attack Jupiter was up close to Earth much closer than any other time in history but I only know this because I was there when it happened. They obviously don't have to breath their atmosphere and can leave the planet and visit other planets as enormous monsters. If they felt the trek to Earth as far away as we are now was worth it we would have a fight on our hands right now. I manipulated the properties of levers for the gear train as well. So levers are magic. We all benefit from the magic without thinking anything is unusual about it when we build things and use trusses or use levers to help do work in the form of wedges and leverage.

I welcome the social interaction of anybody here in this thread, it's possibly a fake ordeal but you are by stating your opinion you still are ignoring me and my attempts to share about Bessler wheel ideas. You would rather participate with your opinion about Ubwe than talk about anti gravity just with that very post there Trev and MrTim and daxwc. I think that I talked some sense into them though. How relentless can Ubwe be? I was being a nice guy.

The levers directly connected to other levers with separate axles grounded on the ground both separates the weight on the axles structurally and suspends the weights on the levers so it's anti gravity because the weight suspended on the levers eats up part of the downward force. It does this because it's suspended on an additional axle or more. The first axle makes the long end of the lever lighter and the second axle makes the second axle lighter because part of the force is made lighter on the previous first axle. I believe and I'm telling you that a group of levers with their own axles lighten the load compounded in the form of anti gravity because each additional axle is lightened by the previous axles levers.

[UbWe]

They're destroying the forum. Not a single post about Bessler's wheel this morning. Really needs to be some active moderation. Scott was last on the forum a month ago. If it was up to me I'd have banned the lot of them already.

Bessler was arrested for being a fraud for a reason. Why am I the ultimate fraud when I build
and discuss Bessler's clues? It is okay for me to be "heckled" for showing my work. I will be staying
out of this forum because I do not feel safe here. And oyvvus told me I shouldn't expect to feel safe
here. He is a part of orpheus.org.
https://besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopi ... =10&t=4656

And there is this; https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.3097 and the paper he wrote;
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.3097.pdf

Leibniz was a contemporary of Newton's and wrote Newton saying check his wheel out. Gottfried Leibniz
is know as many things but in math it might be for f(x) = ∫ Δy/Δx which is basic calculus. And with Bessler
he most likely knew trigonometry which includes both the unit circle and verifying trigonometric identities.
Those were the maths of his day. Trigonometric identities and the unit circle can be used to consider force (torque)
and leverage at various angles.

And with calculus, limits can be defined using the ∫ or simply by factoring a limit with lim it's x
....................................................................................................................................... lim ----> +/-n while n is any number or +/- ∞ (infinity)
Just basic stuff but I am the problem in here. And I am pushing to finish my build thi month so best for me to focus on what I can do to be
productive. I am using lead but can water work? That is my thread.

[agor95]

They're destroying the forum. Not a single post about Bessler's wheel this morning. Really needs to be some active moderation. Scott was last on the forum a month ago. If it was up to me I'd have banned the lot of them already.

The 20th August is the 12 month since I initiated the 'AP Wheel within Wheel' thread.

It appears some members are in the thrall to a negative soul and are going into the ignore room for six months.
It's a shame they will miss out but the forum quality is more important.

Regards

[Fletcher]

Here's Wubbly's original sim .. animation below .. note I turn ON the motor drive after a while ..

...............



...............

Update ..

I decided to make a sim more representative of Techstuff's original photo's of his claimed "working" PM wheel - in his photo's of his wheel he used flexible tapered fiberglass rods (I think, IIRC) with weights at the ends .. in wm2d an accurate approximation of these can be made using "flexbeams" .. you can build them yourself or use a flexbeam script (no taper effect) - I've tried to use the script in the past and crashed my computer over and over (n.b. the more segments the more computing power required i.e. complexity goes up by n^2) .. anyways I tried again and the same thing kept happening (very frustrating) .. 2 long days to sort it out ..

Finally got my computer to stop crashing - the usual fix is to shut it all down and restart (many times if necessary) - this usually works but not this time - eventually I went in and cleared all my history which I hadn't done for a while (kept cookies) - wm2d working like a charm again - phew ..

So I built my own versions of flexbeams (4 various ways as it turns out) - then I used the script again but limited segments to 3 - then I added some workarounds that reduced the complexity of the off-the-shelf flexbeam script I used in this sim - now it is all stable and working as it should - always learning something ..

...............

The sim is attached beneath for those interested ..

I start the sim with the Motor turned OFF - note that the sim gains System KE (located under time) - this is the PE lost by the flexbeams and weights adjusting position downwards (settling) - after 1 second I turn the Motor ON (set to 25 rpm) for a further 1 second and then turn it OFF again ..

You can see for yourselves that the System KE is gradually eaten up (by the impacts, as I have not turned on air resistance or the pin friction script etc), and the wheel rpm "trends" towards zero when the animation runs out ..

Conclusion .. The sim predicts (as it always did, that this arrangement, whether from a standing start, or from given initial rpm (push), does not accelerate and gain in KE - as most of us would suspect, and did suspect at the time .. it finds it "keel" position ! - watch the BMW symbol, and where it is located, for COM/COG ..

I had never thought it had any chance of being a "runner" as claimed, and altho Wubbly's spring loaded lever-weights also show the exact same result I thought it worth the effort to try and use flexbeams (**with workarounds) to get a more accurate interpretation of Techstuff's original build .. draw your own conclusions about his claims, and the sim predictions, and my analysis etc ..

P.S. I wonder why I didn't sort out my workarounds for the flexbeams years ago, and then used them when optimal to do so - I know, usually not worth the trouble when some other building element will do the job more than adequately in most cases ..

................



................

[preoccupied]

Gottfried Leibniz might not have originated with the first calculations of calculus because Newton was writing to him and openly sharing about math. I think that Leibniz might have created the same calculus but with Newton being the origin of all of the main concepts according to Newtons claims and I feel like it might be true. I'm one of the believers that Newton was the origin of Calculus and all of Calculus. I know I'm making comment on what Ubwe said and it might aggravate him but I am rolling the dice here.

I would have some respect for anyone who talks about or asks questions about my anti gravity concept. I am not just making up random gibberish and sharing it. I am pretty sure this was solidly tested before I just don't have the resources to make some right now. I am referring to the crowbar dolly and related lever on levers explanation. Something that I would have liked to have made a prototype of but my resources never added up for it last year. So it's public domain legally I guess what a shame.

What's the difference between Techstuff's design and just a swastika? The swastika if the impacts happen in the corners at the top right would apply force about a lever length away from the wheel in the direction of rotation. If the swastika impacts the wheel before reaching the top right it will have less torque applied to the wheel. I think Techstuff's drawing lacks a position where the impact back from the spring applies torque on the wheel. I think that best scenario for the kind of thing going on in the swastika or Techstuff's drawing is for the Swastika to hold a tight grip on a slight bending of an arm and hold it until it reaches the top right position to release it for maximum torque against he wheel. Because the leverage is a full lever length when it bends the lever and the bending of the lever isn't nearly a whole lever wide - maybe that would work.

[UbWe]

People can read it if they want. Then we can say if Leibniz plagiarized Newton then he was not a credible witness.
Then everyone is right and Bessler was a fraud. And if only building will tell, I do not know of anyone who cites
what Bessler wrote when describing what they are building, ie. The dog creeps out of his kennel
just as far as his chain will stretch. , Except for a small change in the external dimensions of the wheel for raising
weights (or so-called "running wheel"),
About Newton's and Leibniz's work on calculus;
https://www.oxfordscholastica.com/blog/ ... -calculus/
https://engines.egr.uh.edu/episode/1375

[Fletcher]

...

I would have some respect for anyone who talks about or asks questions about my anti gravity concept. I am not just making up random gibberish and sharing it. I am pretty sure this was solidly tested before I just don't have the resources to make some right now.

I am referring to the crowbar dolly and related lever on levers explanation. Something that I would have liked to have made a prototype of but my resources never added up for it last year. So it's public domain legally I guess what a shame.

What's the difference between Techstuff's design and just a swastika? The swastika if the impacts happen in the corners at the top right would apply force about a lever length away from the wheel in the direction of rotation. If the swastika impacts the wheel before reaching the top right it will have less torque applied to the wheel. I think Techstuff's drawing lacks a position where the impact back from the spring applies torque on the wheel.

I think that best scenario for the kind of thing going on in the swastika or Techstuff's drawing is for the Swastika to hold a tight grip on a slight bending of an arm and hold it until it reaches the top right position to release it for maximum torque against he wheel. Because the leverage is a full lever length when it bends the lever and the bending of the lever isn't nearly a whole lever wide - maybe that would work.

You could have made and tested these in Algodoo at any time Jon, had you persisted in learning the program ..

However if you want to proceed .. post up your drawings again and I'll see what I can do for you .. no promises - so take your time so there are no do-overs for me ..

[preoccupied]

I drew this it didn't take very long. You can adjust obvious mistakes such as how i tried to reset the block with a stick which might not be precise. I'm open to your input to improve it. I put a block that wedges the bended lever on the swastika that is kicked off by a stick separate from the wheel so that it will release on the top right. The spring should be so tight that it can't move but beyond the point it reaches. I guess the spring could be at the elbow joint but it could be a lever that bends throughout the lever like a board would if it were solidly attached; the real deal is that the lever has to be very strongly resistant to going beyond the point where it is blocked from coming back the other way. I mean it bends and goes past the block but not much further and this would give it the most torque on the top right corner.

[preoccupied]

So the block was being pushed on by the stick outside of the wheel in a way that would get stuck I think in my previous image. I am just not very familiar with clocks and escapements and I'm not sure how to do it. So I drew this which looks like if the levers are flexible it will apply a small amount of friction and resistance in order to push the black out of place and then slide past the stick.

[UbWe]

People can read it if they want. Then we can say if Leibniz plagiarized Newton then he was not a credible witness.
Then everyone is right and Bessler was a fraud. And if only building will tell, I do not know of anyone who cites
what Bessler wrote when describing what they are building, ie. The dog creeps out of his kennel
just as far as his chain will stretch. , Except for a small change in the external dimensions of the wheel for raising
weights (or so-called "running wheel"),
About Newton's and Leibniz's work on calculus;
https://www.oxfordscholastica.com/blog/ ... -calculus/
https://engines.egr.uh.edu/episode/1375

The kennel and chain and the so-called running wheel. It is used in conjunction with;

Seen sideways or full face it is as glorious as a peacock's tail.
It turns to the right and to the left.
It spins around in any direction whether laden or empty.

A bidirectional wheel that uses water and bellows because

The rain flows. Snow falls.
The jack fires. The bow twangs;
a large herd of fat, lazy,
plump horses wanders aimlessly. and A wheel appears - is it really a wheel, for it does not have a normal rim.

Water flows in the rim itself. With MT 67, the bellows could be connected so when the top bellow opens the bottom
bellow closes. Lines and pulleys would work better but if he used the 3rd image then he might've used that, the technology
back then was lacking. With MT 138 he most likely used "E" for the frame and possibly to connect opposing bellows.